Billtoo? One thing I've always noticed using Qupzilla on all my Puppy installs, be they frugal or hard drive: Unless I had an accompanying KDE-4.7.3 desktop equally installed ( you can find it under "Additional Software" by Battleshooter ) the browser failed to render .gif files, especially those found here on the forum - they would all be replaced by little "?" marks in blue boxes. Most annoying to be sure!

It would do this even if I had a full install ( "full" as in "entirely complete" ) of the Qt-4 libraries under "/usr/libs/qt4". I found this to be quite strange. So apparently it was lacking something from the "/usr/libs/kde4" section despite my doing an "ldd qupzilla" check in CLI for dependencies and having it tell me that all dependencies were met.

Like I said, however, once I added the KDE-4.7.3 desktop qupzilla worked perfectly fine. In fact, I frequently use it here when not using Dillo-3.0.2.

Just thought I'd throw this in to compare notes with you to see what you've discovered.

Billtoo? One thing I've always noticed using Qupzilla on all my Puppy installs, be they frugal or hard drive: Unless I had an accompanying KDE-4.7.3 desktop equally installed ( you can find it under "Additional Software" by Battleshooter ) the browser failed to render .gif files, especially those found here on the forum - they would all be replaced by little "?" marks in blue boxes. Most annoying to be sure!

It would do this even if I had a full install ( "full" as in "entirely complete" ) of the Qt-4 libraries under "/usr/libs/qt4". I found this to be quite strange. So apparently it was lacking something from the "/usr/libs/kde4" section despite my doing an "ldd qupzilla" check in CLI for dependencies and having it tell me that all dependencies were met.

Like I said, however, once I added the KDE-4.7.3 desktop qupzilla worked perfectly fine. In fact, I frequently use it here when not using Dillo-3.0.2.

Just thought I'd throw this in to compare notes with you to see what you've discovered.

Cheers/Amicalement,

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge d'Acadie"

Hi, I haven't seen that yet, I compiled QupZilla in Fatslacko and it shows qt470 because I installed kdegames and qt470 gets installed too along with the kde stuff, I'm a bit of a kshisen addict

I've been spending most of my time in fatdog64 600a2 and I have the full qt482 installed in that, I haven't noticed any blue boxes while using QupZilla in fatdog.

Thanks for the updated info Billtoo re: Qupzilla. How fascinating that it works for you so well and yet not for me unless as I've described in my above post. -scratches head-

Oh well! As I used to tell people when doing gecko developement, "When working in a static environment it was always easy to predict just how it [ gecko ] would work and behave. However, when once released ino the jungle of everyone's hard drive with hundreds upon hundreds of programmes - and you're only using gecko products - no telling how all those zeros and ones will interact!"

In other words: "Is there really such a thing as an 'exact science' out there? REALLY?" I think not. We often delude ourselves... but now I'm robbing the thread and waxing philosophical. LOL!

Again Billtoo: Thanks for the extensive report as it was very much appreciated!

FATSLACKO is a 32bit distro which will work on any current PC that has from 512MB to 64GB of RAM. Not only does it work well on 32bit PCs, but, it will run ALSO on any 64bit Intel/AMD as well. It is fully featured and should do most everything without having to add anything via PPM to be fully functional on desktop or with all devices on your LAN. Enjoy

Here to help_________________Get ACTIVE Create Circles; Do those good things which benefit people's needs!
We are all related ... Its time to show that we know this!
3 Different Puppy Search Enginesor use DogPile

FATSLACKO is a 32bit distro which will work on any current PC that has from 512MB to 64GB of RAM. Not only does it work well on 32bit PCs, but, it will run ALSO on any 64bit Intel/AMD as well. It is fully featured and should do most everything without having to add anything via PPM to be fully functional on desktop or with all devices on your LAN. Enjoy

Here to help

I've tried FAT Slacko and it does work in just 512 MB of RAM, but there's a snag in my experience; you can't eject the CD from the drive, e.g. to play a CD or DVD or burn an ISO to a CD etc., with only that much RAM.

FATSLACKO is a 32bit distro which will work on any current PC that has from 512MB to 64GB of RAM. Not only does it work well on 32bit PCs, but, it will run ALSO on any 64bit Intel/AMD as well. It is fully featured and should do most everything without having to add anything via PPM to be fully functional on desktop or with all devices on your LAN. Enjoy

Here to help

I've tried FAT Slacko and it does work in just 512 MB of RAM, but there's a snag in my experience; you can't eject the CD from the drive, e.g. to play a CD or DVD or burn an ISO to a CD etc., with only that much RAM.

It's a good effort anyway, so thanks for putting it together.

CP .

From the developer.....

01micko wrote:

FATSlacko is NOT an official product but a puplet. It is directly based on the upcoming Slacko-5.3.3. It is also the PAE version which will see your large RAM and as such is recommended for higher end machines.

FATSLACKO is a 32bit distro which will work on any current PC that has from 512MB to 64GB of RAM. Not only does it work well on 32bit PCs, but, it will run ALSO on any 64bit Intel/AMD as well. It is fully featured and should do most everything without having to add anything via PPM to be fully functional on desktop or with all devices on your LAN. Enjoy

Here to help

I've tried FAT Slacko and it does work in just 512 MB of RAM, but there's a snag in my experience; you can't eject the CD from the drive, e.g. to play a CD or DVD or burn an ISO to a CD etc., with only that much RAM.

It's a good effort anyway, so thanks for putting it together.

CP .

From the developer.....

01micko wrote:

FATSlacko is NOT an official product but a puplet. It is directly based on the upcoming Slacko-5.3.3. It is also the PAE version which will see your large RAM and as such is recommended for higher end machines.

I tried to be polite to the Devs of FATSlacko
AFAIK they use that spelling for iso? But I cheated
and used consequently??? FATslacko for all else?
I take a look just in case not being consistent. Good catch.
AFAIK I certainly are/is very consistent in menu.lst
and the subdir. So something else goes wrong.
Can be that I am using a single core Atom N250?
Maybe that one is demanding. The error messages in red
are too numerous to write down. Seems to be about
files and drivers and I don't get anything out of them.
Totally new to me what they write there. No other
puppy had had these messages._________________I use Google Search on Puppy Forum
not an ideal solution though

Ah maybe Acer D250 is 32 bit while Acer D255 is a 64-bit one?
That would explain it? But the error codes did not mention it.

I switch computer and see what happens

FATSlacko is 32 bit, with PAE to support large RAM. If ordinary 32bit Slacko (PAE version) boots then this will boot as long as you have 512 RAM (Thanks Colonel Panic for tests ).

It shares the same code base as Slacko so that's why I left the main sfs with Slacko in the name. It keeps it entirely compatible with PPM and Slickpet. I may change this at a future date and also change the name as not to confuse with FatDog. The 2 projects are unrelated in a base code sense. There is no multiuser in FATSlacko or Slacko at the current time.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum